As you all know, we are under attack by this government. They (the US/Obama/intelligence agencies) have now stepped up their attack. The daily truth about Libya, our eyewitness of the war crimes by NATO and the US in Libya are not to be publicized. The CIA told us to forget Libya or they would take our lives from us. It was not enough to ruin us financially, alienate us from our friends and family and make us homeless. They are now beginning to target us physically. We have been doing speaking engagements and we have been packing the houses. At these events we name the names of the agencies and the agents that came into our homes and threatened us. This obviously was not acceptable, they called and told us that we were the worst of the worst because we were naming the names of these agents and they (the agents) could be in danger now?
Last night they took it one step further, we were followed from Houston, by the police. 70 miles of non-stop “right on our bumper”. When we were in the middle of nowhere, in East Texas, we were stopped by Texas Highway Patrol, lights flashing. The officer came up and did not ask for registration, did not ask for insurance, just said step out of the car. A drug dog was produced and after much encouragement, by the officer, we were told the dog “marked??? drugs in our vehicle”. We were arrested/detained for 2 hours, on the side of the road, while our car and all our belongings were removed from our SUV. Hundreds of searches in the same location, in our car, produced NO DRUGS!! The arresting officer; B. Lamb Jr. badge # 12101 of Region 2, District C, Area 08, was on constant phone discussions with somebody when NO DRUGS were found, we were released. They were frustrated they did not find any illegal substances. The officer doing the search kept returning time and time again to the same spot, someone on the phone was telling him where to look.
Last night was a very, very bad experience, we were held for 2 hours illegally. It was an illegal stop, and an illegal search. We continue our work to put out the truth, if we disappear we pray that our friends and supporters will try to find us.
God Bless you all and stay alert, your freedoms are disappearing every day.
A page from a GCHQ top secret document prepared by its secretive JTRIG unit
One of the many pressing stories that remains to be told from the Snowden archive is how western intelligence agencies are attempting to manipulate and control online discourse with extreme tactics of deception and reputation-destruction. It’s time to tell a chunk of that story, complete with the relevant documents.
By publishing these stories one by one, our NBC reporting highlighted some of the key, discrete revelations: the monitoring of YouTube and Blogger, the targeting of Anonymous with the very same DDoS attacks they accuse “hacktivists” of using, the use of “honey traps” (luring people into compromising situations using sex) and destructive viruses. But, here, I want to focus and elaborate on the overarching point revealed by all of these documents: namely, that these agencies are attempting to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse, and in doing so, are compromising the integrity of the internet itself.
Among the core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are two tactics: (1) to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets; and (2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable. To see how extremist these programs are, just consider the tactics they boast of using to achieve those ends: “false flag operations” (posting material to the internet and falsely attributing it to someone else), fake victim blog posts (pretending to be a victim of the individual whose reputation they want to destroy), and posting “negative information” on various forums. Here is one illustrative list of tactics from the latest GCHQ document we’re publishing today:
Other tactics aimed at individuals are listed here, under the revealing title “discredit a target”:
Then there are the tactics used to destroy companies the agency targets:
GCHQ describes the purpose of JTRIG in starkly clear terms: “using online techniques to make something happen in the real or cyber world,” including “information ops (influence or disruption).”
Critically, the “targets” for this deceit and reputation-destruction extend far beyond the customary roster of normal spycraft: hostile nations and their leaders, military agencies, and intelligence services. In fact, the discussion of many of these techniques occurs in the context of using them in lieu of “traditional law enforcement” against people suspected (but not charged or convicted) of ordinary crimes or, more broadly still, “hacktivism”, meaning those who use online protest activity for political ends.
The title page of one of these documents reflects the agency’s own awareness that it is “pushing the boundaries” by using “cyber offensive” techniques against people who have nothing to do with terrorism or national security threats, and indeed, centrally involves law enforcement agents who investigate ordinary crimes:
No matter your views on Anonymous, “hacktivists” or garden-variety criminals, it is not difficult to see how dangerous it is to have secret government agencies being able to target any individuals they want – who have never been charged with, let alone convicted of, any crimes – with these sorts of online, deception-based tactics of reputation destruction and disruption. There is a strong argument to make, as Jay Leiderman demonstrated in the Guardianin the context of the Paypal 14 hacktivist persecution, that the “denial of service” tactics used by hacktivists result in (at most) trivial damage (far less than the cyber-warfare tactics favored by the US and UK) and are far more akin to the type of political protest protected by the First Amendment.
The broader point is that, far beyond hacktivists, these surveillance agencies have vested themselves with the power to deliberately ruin people’s reputations and disrupt their online political activity even though they’ve been charged with no crimes, and even though their actions have no conceivable connection to terrorism or even national security threats. As Anonymous expert Gabriella Coleman of McGill University told me, “targeting Anonymous and hacktivists amounts to targeting citizens for expressing their political beliefs, resulting in the stifling of legitimate dissent.” Pointing to this study she published, Professor Coleman vehemently contested the assertion that “there is anything terrorist/violent in their actions.”
Government plans to monitor and influence internet communications, and covertly infiltrate online communities in order to sow dissension and disseminate false information, have long been the source of speculation. Harvard Law Professor Cass Sunstein, a close Obama adviser and the White House’s former head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, wrote a controversial paper in 2008 proposing that the US government employ teams of covert agents and pseudo-”independent” advocates to “cognitively infiltrate” online groups and websites, as well as other activist groups.
Sunstein also proposed sending covert agents into “chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups” which spread what he views as false and damaging “conspiracy theories” about the government. Ironically, the very same Sunstein was recently named by Obama to serve as a member of the NSA review panel created by the White House, one that – while disputing key NSA claims – proceeded to propose many cosmetic reforms to the agency’s powers (most of which were ignored by the President who appointed them).
But these GCHQ documents are the first to prove that a major western government is using some of the most controversial techniques to disseminate deception online and harm the reputations of targets. Under the tactics they use, the state is deliberately spreading lies on the internet about whichever individuals it targets, including the use of what GCHQ itself calls “false flag operations” and emails to people’s families and friends. Who would possibly trust a government to exercise these powers at all, let alone do so in secret, with virtually no oversight, and outside of any cognizable legal framework?
Then there is the use of psychology and other social sciences to not only understand, but shape and control, how online activism and discourse unfolds. Today’s newly published document touts the work of GCHQ’s “Human Science Operations Cell,” devoted to “online human intelligence” and “strategic influence and disruption”:
Under the title “Online Covert Action”,the document details a variety of means to engage in “influence and info ops” as well as “disruption and computer net attack,” while dissecting how human beings can be manipulated using “leaders,” “trust,” “obedience”and “compliance”:
The documents lay out theories of how humans interact with one another, particularly online, and then attempt to identify ways to influence the outcomes – or “game” it:
We submitted numerous questions to GCHQ, including: (1) Does GCHQ in fact engage in “false flag operations” where material is posted to the Internet and falsely attributed to someone else?; (2) Does GCHQ engage in efforts to influence or manipulate political discourse online?; and (3) Does GCHQ’s mandate include targeting common criminals (such as boiler room operators), or only foreign threats?
As usual, they ignored those questions and opted instead to send their vague and nonresponsive boilerplate: “It is a longstanding policy that we do not comment on intelligence matters. Furthermore, all of GCHQ’s work is carried out in accordance with a strict legal and policy framework which ensures that our activities are authorised, necessary and proportionate, and that there is rigorous oversight, including from the Secretary of State, the Interception and Intelligence Services Commissioners and the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee. All our operational processes rigorously support this position.”
These agencies’ refusal to “comment on intelligence matters” – meaning: talk at all about anything and everything they do – is precisely why whistleblowing is so urgent, the journalism that supports it so clearly in the public interest, and the increasingly unhinged attacks by these agencies so easy to understand. Claims that government agencies are infiltrating online communities and engaging in “false flag operations” to discredit targets are often dismissed as conspiracy theories, but these documents leave no doubt they are doing precisely that.
Whatever else is true, no government should be able to engage in these tactics: what justification is there for having government agencies target people – who have been charged with no crime – for reputation-destruction, infiltrate online political communities, and develop techniques for manipulating online discourse? But to allow those actions with no public knowledge or accountability is particularly unjustifiable.
The last few weeks have seen the complete crumbling of the case against Libya’s former leader Muammar Gaddafi as the perpetrator of the Lockerbie bombing. Framed by the West, it is clear that the ‘evidence’ against Libya is now proven to be false and it is now Iran that is evidenced as the new suspect. Whoever did bring down the plane – it was not Gaddafi.
But there remain serious claims that it was the CIA who actually planted the bomb. What we know for certain is that both the CIA and the British government knew Libya was not responsible and deliberately withheld information that would have seen the convicted Libyan, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, acquitted of the bombing.
Both Western governments and the Western media used Lockerbie as a way of demonising Gaddafi – ensuring that the brain-washed people of Britain and America would not make too much fuss if the opportunity ever presented itself to go to war against Libya.
As well as being a convenient scapegoat, this is why Gaddafi was framed for the Lockerbie bombing.
In 2011, that opportunity to launch war on Libya arose – thanks to severe subversion of the North African state by the West. The Western media went into overdrive and it was not long before one British newspaper – ‘The Sun’ – carried a full front-page story: ‘Gaddafi Ordered Lockerbie Bombing’.
This startling information came from none other than Abdul Jalil – a former Libyan Jamahiriyah Government minister who was facing an investigation by Gaddafi for corruption. Jalil had quickly switched sides and was keen to appease his Western backers.
The article, published on February 24th 2011, carried no evidence to back up the claims – which are now, of course, utterly discredited.
The piece was written by the journalist Tom Newton Dunn.
The fact that Newton Dunn would put his name to such a piece of gutter ‘journalism’ was no surprise to me – as some years earlier I had personally exchanged a number of private and intense communications with him over the subject of the Iraq war.
Due to my previous involvement with the British media, when I spent many years (under another name) exposing something to do with horses, I gained a considerable number of contacts in press and television. Newton Dunn was not, as far as I know, interested in my subject, but our paths crossed when he was a reporter for the British newspaper ‘The Daily Mirror’.
Newton Dunn and I argued for some weeks over the rights and wrongs of invading Iraq. He supported the war – I did not. Despite my best efforts, Newton Dunn felt the West getting rid of Saddam – whom he would call a nasty dictator – was in the best interests of the Iraqis. He was not concerned with my argument that Iraq was now doomed and the West’s killing machine would be beyond anything Saddam could unleash.
Since then, we now indeed see Iraq ruined and over a million dead – purely for oil. Somehow, I do not believe Newton Dunn has changed his mind…
The Mirror was a newspaper fiercely opposed to the Iraq war from the very start. Therefore, it was no surprise to me that not long after I ceased all communications with him, Newton Dunn left the Mirror and joined The Sun.
The Sun newspaper is a right-wing propaganda machine and a warmongering monster. It viciously promotes British state terrorism at every sick opportunity – as well as promoting Islamophobia and xenophobia. It is also cheap and childish in its style and desperate to appeal to every lowest common denominator that it thinks its jingoistic readers want to read.
However, The Sun’s most infamous institution is that of its daily Page Three feature – a naked woman with large breasts.
Despite being more than well endowed myself, I have never understood why so many young females in my country have an ambition to be a ‘Page Three Girl’ – thereby, losing their dignity, morality and decency in the process.
Bizarrely, as well as writing about wars, Newton Dunn was also tasked, at the same time, with writing the accompanying text to the Page Three feature.
Using military language (so I will too then), Newton Dunn lasciviously wrote about one girl and the size of her two forward-facing assets as – what he called – her “cannons”.
Any credibility Newton Dunn might ever have had as a journalist had now reached its end…
The Sun is owned by the ‘elite’ Jew, Rupert Murdoch – who personally telephoned the then British Prime Minister Tony Blair and ordered him to do the Iraq war.
One of The Sun’s most infamous editors was Rebekah Brooks (at that time, Rebekah Wade). Brooks is currently on trial in the British courts on charges of phone hacking – including that of a murdered schoolgirl.
Brooks is also a former editor of The Sun’s sister paper, ‘The News Of The World’ – now reinvented as ‘The Sun On Sunday’, after the phone hacking revelations caused The News Of The World to close down.
Brooks is also the former chief executive of the Murdoch media empire known as ‘News International’. Murdoch owned The News Of The World and owns The Sun On Sunday.
Also on trial with Brooks – and for the same charges of both phone hacking at this newspaper and misconduct in public office – is another former editor of The News Of The World, Andy Coulson.
Coulson became one of the personnel of British Prime Minister David Cameron – working for him as communications director. After the phone hacking scandal broke, Coulson was eventually forced to resign – much to Cameron’s reluctance. (I always say you can judge a man by his friends)…
Rebekah Brooks is an ardent Murdoch lackey. The trial has recently seen the exposing of the text of secret emails sent to Brooks by Tony Blair – advising and helping her on how to deal with the situation she now finds herself in…
Blair has recently been accused of having an affair with Murdoch’s wife, Wendi Deng. He, of course, strenuously denies this allegation. Whatever the truth, Deng was clearly obsessed with Blair – and Murdoch is now divorcing her.
Brooks was married to the British soap actor Ross Kemp – himself, an ardent supporter of British state terrorists. During the relationship, she had an adulterous affair – with Andy Coulson. Kemp subsequently divorced her.
Rebekah Brooks is now married to former racehorse trainer Charlie Brooks – a man who had been an invaluable contact of mine some years earlier. I found him to be one of few genuinely nice and decent people in his profession. He was extremely kind to me in all my dealings with him – and I still treasure today his detailed and honest hand-written notes to me on my lengthy ‘where are they now’ questionnaire I gave him about his horses.
I later watched in sadness as he became involved with and then married Rebekah Wade – and now he stands dragged down to her level, accused of perverting the course of justice by helping his wife get rid of potentially incriminating evidence against her – including a missing laptop.
Today, The Sun continues to misinform its readers – usually boys and men keen to get their daily fix of Page Three and with few brain cells to rub together between them – that the world must get rid of another ‘nasty dictator’, President Assad of Syria.
What the likes of journalists and editors at The Sun will never tell their readers is the truth. In the case of Syria, just like Libya - readers will not be told that there is no real ‘civil war’– for the vast number of foreigners fighting Assad are funded and sent there by the very same people that Newton Dunn and Brooks serve, or who pay their wages.
Those people being the likes of Murdoch and Blair – and now David Cameron – and their New World Order, as espoused by the United States of America and ‘israel’ and their wars for oil or regional control.
And to hell with how many people die for it…
(Author’s note: I would like to thank everyone who has read and enjoyed / empathised with my articles. Regulars will know that they have been primarily written under the name ‘The Girl Who Loves Khamis’. As of the recent book review I did here, my primary writing name will now be Lady Khamis. This is because it is more suitable as I become better known and respected for my work. I will NOT be dropping my TGWLK nickname though – as there is no truer statement!
All this would not have been possible without my dear editor and friend, al-Fatah. Shukran jazeelan).
The ‘exporting democracy’ applying U.S. President Barack Obama, following in the footsteps of his predecessors, has caused the people of various countries adamantly disapprove of Washington politics.
Both the Obama Administration, like the image of the country in general, suffers from severe fluctuations both in the same U.S. territory, and in the international arena. While, despite the revelations of Edward Snowden , most U.S. allies still at his side, in the world there are several countries that “hate” Washington, the newspaper reported ‘ 24/7 Wall St ‘ .
1. Palestinian Territories Index disapproval of U.S. policies: 80% Four out of five Palestinians disapproved of U.S. policy, which is the worst perception of U.S. worldwide. The cause of this situation is the U.S. support for Israel in the framework of its conflict with Palestine . In addition, Hamas, the organization that governs the territory of the Gaza Strip since 2007, is considered by the U.S. and the EU as a “terrorist organization.”
2. Pakistan Index disapproval of U.S. policies: 73% Relations with Pakistan have been strained since 2001, when after the terrorist attacks of 11-S Washington became Pakistan in the field of search operations leader Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden and the war in Afghanistan against the Taliban, who then ruled the neighboring country. Already in 2009, 59% of the Pakistani people saw the U.S. as a bully and a larger than itself Al Qaeda threat. Latest Gallup polls reveal that this trend continues.
3. Lebanon Indexdisapproval of U.S. policies: 71% Like many countries disapprove of the American line, the Lebanon has a long history of conflict with Israel, which explains that Lebanese criticize Washington.
4. Yemen index disapproval of U.S. policies: 69% Over 100 Yemeni nationals held in Guantánamo have been in recent years. Relations between the two countries are so tense that the U.S. State Department advised its citizens to avoid travel to Yemen due to the extremely high security threat level.
5. Iraq Index disapproval of U.S. policies: 67% The long history of conflict between the U.S. and Iraq -from the 1991 Gulf War until the Iraq War (2003 – 2011) – which killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, including civilians, has contributed significantly to the negative reviews about Washington. For U.S. citizens “Travel the country is extremely dangerous due to civil unrest and the threat of kidnappings and terrorist attacks.”
6. Egypt index disapproval of U.S. policies: 57% A list of countries “not recommended for travel”, the U.S. State Department has also added to Egypt, “because of the instability and violence across the country.”
7. Slovenia Index disapproval of U.S. policies: 57% Although the U.S. State Department states that the two countries have a strong relationship, more than half of the citizens of Slovenia criticize Washington’s policies. It is noteworthy that among the nations with the highest disapproval ratings of U.S., Slovenia is one who is a member of NATO .
8. Iran Index disapproval of U.S. policies: 56% Tehran has long been at odds with Washington, and more recently by the Iranian nuclear program. The two countries have no diplomatic relations since 1980. Additionally, political analysts have established that the EU sanctions and the U.S., which caused some of the economic problems of the country and had serious consequences for much of the population, led to more resentment towards the U.S.
9. Tunisia Index disapproval of U.S. policies: 54% Although the U.S. provided $ 400 million in financial aid to “establish democracy”in the country since 2011, more than half of the population disapproves of Washington politics. The animosity toward the North American country in Tunisia culminated in the sacking of the U.S. Embassy in the capital in 2012. Recent polls confirm the same trend among Tunisians .
10 . Libya Index disapproval of U.S. policies: 94% The U.S. regrets that the people of Libya to go unpunished by the destruction and genocide against Great Jamahiriya more than 240,000 dead, 2 million exiles and over 30,000 political prisoners anddenounced to have disappeared over 220 tons of gold and more than 280 billion dollars from the coffers of the Libyan people.
In a case that is a perfect storm illustration of an arbitrary and incompetent federal government running roughshod over its citizens, “a single sentence tucked into the farm bill” had led to outrageous behavior.
End Times Bible Prophecy and News, End Times Deception, Societal Collapse, Apostasy, False Teachers, whore of Babylon Church, Demonic Attacks, War, Rumors of War, Famine, Pestilence, Salvation in Jesus Christ, NWO, UFOs, Earthquakes, IHOP, False Christs, All Roads Lead to Rome, New World Order, Conspiracies, Nephilim, Giants, New Apostolic Reformation, heresies, Signs and Lying Wonders
Turning and turning in the widening gyre | The falcon cannot hear the falconer | Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold | Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world | The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere | The ceremony of innocence is drowned | The best lack all conviction, while the worst | Are full of passionate intensity. -- W.B. Yeats, The Second Coming